This. If there is one character I would love to see gone, it would be Rachel. Gone, gone, gone.

I like Rachel, I just don't feel like they utilize her enough. And I liked her scene with Mike toward the beginning.

The whole Louis and the Cat thing was ridiculous, both when they first introduced it and in this episode. The thing about Louis, was that he was an annoying sniveling person, but an excellent lawyer when it comes to business law. They've said it and showed it before this season, and he wasn't the type to get rattled. This season they made him totally incompetent, and over a cat. I don't think you make partner acting like that. They really ruined his character for me.

This whole season has just seemed very convoluted to me. Too many twists and turns that hardly make sense. I didn't like that the whole season was on one case. Seemed like they had no other clients.

Oh, and how much did Samsung pay to become "the major client they wanted to get".

Oh, and how much did Samsung pay to become "the major client they wanted to get".

How much money does Michael Jordan get when Harvey name drops him in every other episode?

I did like the "You just got Litt up" mug. Louis supposedly loves mentoring the associates but he dropped them like a hot potato to become the quartermaster - the guy who orders things like pens and granola bars - just to spite the British guy with the ears.

How much money does Michael Jordan get when Harvey name drops him in every other episode?

I did like the "You just got Litt up" mug. Louis supposedly loves mentoring the associates but he dropped them like a hot potato to become the quartermaster - the guy who orders things like pens and granola bars - just to spite the British guy with the ears.

Didn't he lose a bet with the British guy and had to give up the mentoring in order to become the quartermaster? I forgot how that whole thing went down.

Didn't he lose a bet with the British guy and had to give up the mentoring in order to become the quartermaster? I forgot how that whole thing went down.

Now I'm stuck trying to remember this craptastic subplot. Didn't the British guy discontinue buying the granola bars that Louis liked and banned them from the building or something stupid like that while he was quartermaster? Then something happened and Louis ended up being quartermaster and Capt. Ears took over mentoring. An awful, awful season long subplot.

They turned Louis into less of a lawyer, which makes me sad. Love letters to a cat was just ridiculous.

Now, next week's episode makes me think bad things about Mike.

Spoiler:

He tells Rachael that her going to Stanford will be the end of their relationship, and that he'll break up with her if she goes, or something like that. What a pansy! It's not like you can't attempt a long distance relationship. It's only 3 years or something like that.

Now I'm stuck trying to remember this craptastic subplot. Didn't the British guy discontinue buying the granola bars that Louis liked and banned them from the building or something stupid like that while he was quartermaster? Then something happened and Louis ended up being quartermaster and Capt. Ears took over mentoring. An awful, awful season long subplot.

Ears became a dictator of a quartermaster to trick Louis into wanting to be qm so that he could take over Louis' position with the newbies.

__________________discipuli nostrum bardissimi sunt.
- Assuming based on evidence is not the same as knowing.
- If you want to argue with me at least use some actual facts instead of making it up.

He tells Rachael that her going to Stanford will be the end of their relationship, and that he'll break up with her if she goes, or something like that. What a pansy! It's not like you can't attempt a long distance relationship. It's only 3 years or something like that.

I generally expect things like that aired in previews are intentionally edited to be misleading.

__________________
¯\_(ツ)_/¯****************To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

He tells Rachael that her going to Stanford will be the end of their relationship, and that he'll break up with her if she goes, or something like that. What a pansy! It's not like you can't attempt a long distance relationship. It's only 3 years or something like that.

My DVR cut off before the previews so I didn't see this, but I agree-probably edited to fool us-or maybe...

Spoiler:

Maybe Mike really wants Rachel to go to Stanford and she is hemming and hawing, doesn't want to go 3,000 miles away, and he says he will break up with her if she doesn't go...or something to that effect. Or maybe he says he will break up with her for now then they can get back together when she gets back...who knows? I hope she goes to Stanford, what an opportunity! (Yes, I know these aren't real people LOL)

Good point. However, I was watching an episode of Rookie Blue (a trailer for the season finale) and saw a major character get shot. No misleading there. It really ticked me off.

That's pretty bad, but I was watching "The Pitch" on AMC, and

Spoiler:

they had the first company pitch their campaign, then when they broke for a commercial, the announcer said, "You just saw the winning pitch! Go to - whatever website it was - and see what's going on with the campaign!"
Um-WE HADN'T EVEN SEEN THE SECOND COMPANY'S PITCH YET!!!

OK, I'm a bit lost, and perhaps my lack of understanding of the university landscape in the US is not helping me. Columbia is "here" and Stanford is "way over there", but Harvard is neither one of them. So I really don't understand what leverage Jessica had to force Rachel to go away. It made no sense to me. Sign this affidavit or you will not work here -- but the Harvard rule had not yet been breached, so going to Standford still meant she would not work here. What am I missing?

As I was watching the episode (it airs one day later up here) I kept thinking that Jessica would be really concerned about Mike and Rachel splitting up -- surely it would be more likely that she wouldn't have kept the secret if she was no-longer involved? Maybe even spill the beans to her mother in a post-breakup scene? I thought, for sure, that Jessica would be trying to make sure that they stay together, and would actually offer to waive the Harvard rule.

I just feel like I'm either missing something or the writers just messed up a bit.

Oh, and the files of *all* the lawyers that ever went to Harvard only has enough Rosses to count on one hand? There are many scenes like this where I have to laugh -- like Mike writing up some brilliant argument for some case, shows the file folder to Harvey as they walk through the corridor and Harvey, without missing a step, says something like "Wow, did you come up with that all on your own?" Or, last episode, Louis opening the fie on that hot-shot lawyer and in 1 second flat saying "He is exactly what I need".

OK, I'm a bit lost, and perhaps my lack of understanding of the university landscape in the US is not helping me. Columbia is "here" and Stanford is "way over there", but Harvard is neither one of them. So I really don't understand what leverage Jessica had to force Rachel to go away. It made no sense to me. Sign this affidavit or you will not work here -- but the Harvard rule had not yet been breached, so going to Standford still meant she would not work here. What am I missing?

As I was watching the episode (it airs one day later up here) I kept thinking that Jessica would be really concerned about Mike and Rachel splitting up -- surely it would be more likely that she wouldn't have kept the secret if she was no-longer involved? Maybe even spill the beans to her mother in a post-breakup scene? I thought, for sure, that Jessica would be trying to make sure that they stay together, and would actually offer to waive the Harvard rule.

I just feel like I'm either missing something or the writers just messed up a bit.

Oh, and the files of *all* the lawyers that ever went to Harvard only has enough Rosses to count on one hand? There are many scenes like this where I have to laugh -- like Mike writing up some brilliant argument for some case, shows the file folder to Harvey as they walk through the corridor and Harvey, without missing a step, says something like "Wow, did you come up with that all on your own?" Or, last episode, Louis opening the fie on that hot-shot lawyer and in 1 second flat saying "He is exactly what I need".

You are missing something. Rachel didn't get into Harvard. Thus she can't work at Pierson, Spector, wtf ever firm per their "rule". They inferred that if Rachel left she wouldn't come back and they would be "over". The affidavit was to protect the firm I guess. Kinda strange but they kinda used it as a Dues Ex Machina to "keep" Rachel. She goes to school locally at Columbia, stays with Mike, and can work at the firm. Rachel negotiated the deal to sign the affidavit and have Jessica waive the Harvard rule.

As soon as the Harvard lady said the records of every Harvard law graduate were in the room it was pretty obvious that they were going to bring back the Mike is a fraud plot line. I'm hoping for a final resolution on that but not really expecting it.

As I was watching the episode (it airs one day later up here) I kept thinking that Jessica would be really concerned about Mike and Rachel splitting up -- surely it would be more likely that she wouldn't have kept the secret if she was no-longer involved? Maybe even spill the beans to her mother in a post-breakup scene? I thought, for sure, that Jessica would be trying to make sure that they stay together, and would actually offer to waive the Harvard rule.

I just feel like I'm either missing something or the writers just messed up a bit.

IANAL, but I had trouble with the logic there, too.

Looking at character motivations, Jessica wants to protect the firm. To her, that should mean that she wants to keep Mike's secret away from Zane (Rachel's father), since Zane would be likely to use that information to hurt the firm.

From Rachel's point of view, it would be bad for her if her "secret" -- that she knows Mike's secret -- became known. At a minimum, her knowledge of the scheme (and not telling the authorities) would reflect badly on her future career prospects. And perhaps it could be worse for her than that (possible liability?). So, the best move for Rachel (from Jessica's point of view, since Jessica probably underestimates Rachel's integrity), if Rachel were ever deposed, would be to deny that she knew Mike's secret. If Zane thinks that Rachel will be able to credibly deny knowing it, then he will feel free to go after the firm without possibility of hurting his daughter along the way.

But if Rachel signs a statement saying that she knew Mike's secret, then if Zane ever discovers Mike's secret, then Zane should hesitate to go after the firm, since he might also hurt his daughter.

So far, I think the story holds together. Jessica has a logical reason for trying to get Rachel to sign.

But why does Mike think that Rachel going to Stanford is a solution?
If Rachel goes to Stanford without signing, I don't see how Jessica would like that, since Rachel could tell Zane and then Zane could hurt the firm. So Jessica would probably still fire Mike if Rachel went to Stanford without signing.

Is Mike thinking that if Rachel does not sign, Jessica will fire Mike, and then Mike will follow Rachel to California? Maybe change his identity and go to law school with her? Just get a non-law job out there? Either way, it does not seem like a very good solution. Perhaps Mike was just not thinking clearly.

Rachel's solution, however, makes perfect sense. Jessica gets what she wants, which is to protect the firm by getting Rachel's signature. Rachel gets what she wants, which is to work for the firm after she graduates, by Jessica waving the Harvard rule. And Mike gets what he wants, which is for Rachel to stay in New York, since it appears that working for the firm and staying with Mike is more important to Rachel than is going to Stanford.

So, the best explanation that I can come up with is that Mike's logic was flawed (which is not necessarily a writing problem -- Mike was emotionally distraught at the time), but Jessica and Rachel were behaving logically.

Donna got the scumbag - again. To think she actually slept with that guy....

Did you notice that Donna became something of a hypocrite this episode?

Remember when Jessica threatened Mike with a letter and Mike decided to go behind Harvey's back and do what Jessica wanted? Donna was very upset about how Mike had betrayed Harvey by doing what Jessica wanted, and Donna, quite self-righteously, told Mike off about it.

In this episode, Jessica told Donna not to tell Mike or Rachel that Jessica knew about them, and Donna agreed not to tell them. Even so, I completely expected Donna to tell Mike when she went to his cubicle that night. That would be the loyal (to Harvey and Mike) thing to do, and Donna is all about loyalty to her immediate coworkers, right? But no. Donna did not mention it to Mike at all, and Mike was completely surprised when Jessica showed up at his apartment and threatened him about Rachel.

It seems Donna talks a good game, but when the rubber meets the road, she is not as loyal as she pretends to be.

Looking at character motivations, Jessica wants to protect the firm. To her, that should mean that she wants to keep Mike's secret away from Zane (Rachael's father), since Zane would be likely to use that information to hurt the firm.

From Rachael's point of view, it would be bad for her if her "secret" -- that she knows Mike's secret -- became known. At a minimum, her knowledge of the scheme (and not telling the authorities) would reflect badly on her future career prospects. And perhaps it could be worse for her than that (possible liability?). So, the best move for Rachael (from Jessica's point of view, since Jessica probably underestimates Rachael's integrity), if Rachael were ever deposed, would be to deny that she knew Mike's secret. If Zane thinks that Rachael will be able to credibly deny knowing it, then he will feel free to go after the firm without possibility of hurting his daughter along the way.

But if Rachael signs a statement saying that she knew Mike's secret, then if Zane ever discovers Mike's secret, then Zane should hesitate to go after the firm, since he might also hurt his daughter.

So far, I think the story holds together. Jessica has a logical reason for trying to get Rachael to sign.

But why does Mike think that Rachael going to Stanford is a solution?
If Rachael goes to Stanford without signing, I don't see how Jessica would like that, since Rachael could tell Zane and then Zane could hurt the firm. So Jessica would probably still fire Mike if Rachael went to Stanford without signing.

Is Mike thinking that if Rachael does not sign, Jessica will fire Mike, and then Mike will follow Rachael to California? Maybe change his identity and go to law school with her? Just get a non-law job out there? Either way, it does not seem like a very good solution. Perhaps Mike was just not thinking clearly.

Rachael's solution, however, makes perfect sense. Jessica gets what she wants, which is to protect the firm by getting Rachael's signature. Rachael gets what she wants, which is to work for the firm after she graduates, by Jessica waving the Harvard rule. And Mike gets what he wants, which is for Rachael to stay in New York, since it appears that working for the firm and staying with Mike is more important to Rachael than is going to Stanford.

So, the best explanation that I can come up with is that Mike's logic was flawed (which is not necessarily a writing problem -- Mike was emotionally distraught at the time), but Jessica and Rachael were behaving logically.

I think to really know if the solutions made sense, we would have to know what the penalty would be for everybody if it became known that Mike is a fraud.

I think the scene played out ok, because Rachel is the one with leverage. She is the only one who wouldn't personally be punished if it were found out, where the other 3 principles would be punished severely.

Did I miss something, do we know that Rachel made the deal, and do we know that the Harvard rule was waived as a part of that deal?

I am NOT looking forward to a new season of Louis or anybody else going after Mike's fraudulent Harvard career and Louis magically being left alone in a room full of every Harvard Law school graduate's hard copy profiles was weak.